Friday, February 21, 2014

Big Brother Is Tracking Every Where You Go In Your Automobile.

A very scary and important article was written in the 2/21/14 edition of The Detroit News. Who is tracking your travels? How you Drive? How often you drive?

Every time a motorist slides in behind the wheel, odds are
that car or truck is gathering information: How aggressively the driver
accelerated, whether the speed limit was observed, how hard the brake pedal was
applied. And beyond driving habits, where and when the car was driven, what
route was taken and whether the seat belt was buckled.

Few laws or regulations address ownership of data collected
by infotainment and navigation systems in dashboards and by electronic black
boxes under hoods. Auto data privacy is the industry equivalent of the Wild
West, according to automotive industry and law experts.

Should drivers expect information collected by their cars to
be private? Can police or other government agencies get their hands on recorded
data after a crash to review drivers’ whereabouts if they’re suspected of a
crime? What if automakers decided to sell details about driving habits to
marketers who want to broadcast targeted ads as motorists run errands?

These questions come at a time when many Americans are
fearful of their privacy in the wake of National Security Agency leaks and the
answers are largely unclear.

One thing is sure: Automakers collect data and they share
it, several recently told a Government Accountability Office investigation. And
according to the terms of use for many voice-activated and navigation systems,
automakers have the right to share that information with marketers or anyone
else they might want to.

Those facts — and the secrecy surrounding what automakers
might do with personal information — have alarmed consumer advocates and raised
questions within the industry about the future of data collection.

“The automotive industry needs to think hard about the type
of information they want to collect and who they want to pass it on to,” said
Thilo Koslowski, a vice president at technology research firm Gartner Inc.
“Anything that focuses more on the driver than the vehicle, that’s where
consumers won’t find a whole lot of value.”

Few laws restrict what information can be collected, how
long it can be saved and who it can be shared with — whether with private
companies or the government.

The Driver Privacy Act, pending in Washington, pertains only
to so-called event data recorders, or “black boxes.” Like the black boxes on
commercial aircraft, they save key information — in this instance speed, brake
application and seat belt use. The moments leading up to an accident, for
example, would be recorded. The recorders cannot, however, transmit data in
real time.

Fourteen states have laws restricting who can access
black-box data and how it can be shared, according to the National Conference of
State Legislatures. California, for instance, says owners of the vehicle can
retrieve black box information, but so can law enforcement authorities
depending on court jurisdiction. Michigan has no such prohibitions. And no
states prohibit police from accessing information after a crash.

President Barack Obama in 2012 introduced a White House
Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights that outlines a set of common privacy practices
for multiple industries, including automotive. But on the eve of its second
birthday, the blueprint hasn’t gained traction with lawmakers.

Ford Motor Co. chief executive Alan Mulally has called on
the federal government to provide guidance on consumer privacy. “It’s really
important that we have boundaries and guidelines,” he said at the Detroit auto
show last month.

Ford recently received a patent for targeted in-car
advertisements: Cars would collect data, including location, to decide which
ads to broadcast to each driver. Other automakers are looking at similar
features.

Some studies suggest a majority of consumers would accept
microtargeted ads, but Koslowski said motorists might consider such targeted
advertising more invasive than helpful. “If the marketing angle was that
interesting, Google would have been there 10 years ago,” he said.

High Court's stance unclear

The U.S. Supreme Court has indicated it isn’t sure how it
would rule in some cases involving automotive privacy.

In the 2012 case United States v. Jones, the court found
that long-term attachment of a GPS by the government to a private citizen’s
vehicle constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment. Justice Samuel Alito
wrote that “even if the public does not welcome the diminution of privacy that
new technology entails, they may eventually reconcile themselves to this
development as inevitable.”

Data collection for infotainment, voice-activated or
navigation systems is outlined in written terms agreed to by consumers before
they use a voice-activated, navigation or infotainment system. Those agreements
are often filled with dense legal jargon. Most motorists click “yes” without
reading.

Some public interest groups such as the Washington-based
Electronic Privacy Information Center are calling for federal legislation to
make those contracts consumer friendly; drivers would decide exactly what data
could be shared.

“None of this data collection should be turned on as
default, especially when they are collecting so much information,” said Khaliah
Barnes, administrative law counsel at the center.

Until the rules become clearer, motorists could unknowingly
share personal information or have their own data used against them in court.

“These are still corporations and this information is still
going to be worth a lot of money to various people,” said attorney Steven
Gursten, owner at Michigan Auto Law and president of the Motor Vehicle Trial
Lawyers Association. “We are depending on the good citizenship of nameless
people in giant corporations to keep our info private.”